Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment

[ayeaye]

There is really not a Lenz law, it is not a separate law, it's just a symmetry of the induction process. If there is only one circuit involved, then it works in a way that it works against the changes in the current. But in case of capacitance, capacitance is not really the same circuit, and capacitance is everywhere, thus not much current in the main circuit is necessary to charge it either. So like not much works against the changes, that may enable the changes to become greater, like induction to be greater. This is only an intuitive thinking, as i said.

But induction, to get some idea. Atoms, they are like fire wheels. The electrons orbiting the nucleus. They are also the dipoles. Electrostatic charges are really all there is, and they are very strong, but there is always a balance. Magnetism is just a phenomenon caused by these charges. Induction is these atoms changing current in a conductor. When they are more or less towards the wire with their side, which is the orbiting electrons, then they can change the current. The electrons are orbiting, the force is moving. But that alone is not enough. Now in autumn, there are these leaves on the ground, many of them. And there are a kind of blowers, to blow them away. Now, when you direct them at any point, with not a great angle, all you get is the leaves just are blown away to all directions. Even if you move the air stream, they are still blown away to all direction, that movement doesn't cause them to move in one direction. You may try it once.

But when the atoms move towards the wire, or rotate towards the wire, like when the force goes over the electron, then first it pushes it to one direction, then to the opposite direction. And when the force is stronger when it pushes to the opposite direction, the result is a force in one direction, one force minus the other. Just to figure a bit. That's what induction is.

The matter is, it is a very symmetric process, expressed by the Lenz law. So that when there is this process alone, there likely cannot be any overunity. Not quite the same though when there are two processes at the same time. And one is charging the capacitance, charging a capacitance is not the same process as induction.

Now the electrons orbiting the nuclea of the atoms. When these electrons interact with some charges outside, they do work. As the result their energy should decrease, and they should ultimately fall to the nucleus. But they don't. So some energy has to come from outside to keep them orbiting, this is what a common thinking says, right? Now if you ask a quantum physicist, they give you various explanations, which finally still don't explain the thing. One may say, no, this is not how it happens. They say it happens in a different way, but still there is a need for energy to come somewhere, whatever the effect is called.

[F6FLT]

F6FLT
Right... lose the simulator it's useless. Real experiments done by real people produce real results.

Impossible you say?.
It may help to go over some high school science textbook theory.
...

"Impossible" only in the context of our actual application of our knowledge, and it's very likely our application and not the current knowledge which is at stack.

So far, no alternative theory has produced the slightest energy, the slightest means of transport or the slightest useful product, contrarily to applications of textbook theories. It's at least premature to be immodest with regard to them. I would feel ridiculous to criticize textbook theories whose results are everywhere in the every day life, when I have nothing else to show. It's always the lack of mastery in interpreting what is observed that let the newbies think that they have to reinvent physics and that the genious men of the past in electromagnetism are wrong. I don't believe in wishful thinking about new physics.

That said, it's not "impossible" in absolute: I believe in observed facts and we have the facts, my coils resonate much lower than LCω²=1, so we have a misinterpretation of L or C or both.
A possible answer that came to me last night is that the stored charge in the capacitor goes back and forth along the capacitor dielectric and participates to a displacement current that is not only transverse as in a normal plane capacitor, but also partially directed along the conductors. This would explain a real C and L values higher than those calculated by applying basic methods. It's the first possibility I will explore.

[gyulasun]

Hi F6FLT,

Do you have an L meter which is able to measure in the some uH range or below? Because you could check inductance for your 6 m long coax cable at one of its ends when the far ends is shorted. Also, you could check inductance for the bifilar (strip) coil at one of its ends when the two ends at the other end is shorted.

For your RG214 coax (which is a 50 Ohm type) with 106 pF/m the C=6 x 106=636 pF. Using Z²=L/C impedance formula for transmission lines,
the L=C*Z²=636e^-12 * 2500= 1.59 uH. It would be good to check the 636 pF cable capacitance with a C meter too becasue some data sheet say it can have 98 or 100 pF/m capacitance. The 1.59 uH gives resonance with the 636 pF at 5 MHz. To get your measured 2.55 MHz resonance, the L should be roughly 4 times of 1.59 uH i.e. 6.36 uH.
Is it possible that there is around 6.36 uH inductance either between the two ends of the shield or between the two ends of the center conductor? You could check the inductance of any one winding in the bifilar coil too.  It is not likely the inductance between the shield ends (or the inner conductor ends) will be around 6.3 uH though.

To be continued.  It would be great you happen to have an LC meter. 

Thanks,
Gyula

[F6FLT]

Hi Gyula,

I measured the capacitance of the cable with its 2 N-type connectors: 672 pF.
I have no L meter. For the inductance calculated at https://www.eeweb.com/tools/coil-inductance, I got 364 nH. But I just understood my mistake, I had entered 191 mm for the loop diameter instead of 1910 mm!
With the right value, I have now 6.4µH which gives a resonance frequency of 2.43 Mhz very close to that one measured.

So the answer to your question "Is it possible that there is around 6.36 uH inductance" is "yes it is"  . Thanks.

The strange effect with the flat coil is therefore not reproduced with the coaxial cable. This is a bad news.

So would it be possible that the inductance of the flat coil to be about 587µH instead of some tens of nH as previously thought?
Yes it is! 
I used this method:  http://www.dos4ever.com/inductor/inductor.html
I measured 703 µH.

This gives a resonance frequency a bit lower than measured (28 KHz), but it's the order of magnitude.

Now we are back with the problem of the second resonance at 2330 Khz. How is it possible while LCω² implies 28 KHz?
It's one or the other resonance but not both. Or at 2330KHz we are no more in the quasi-stationary approximation and the resonance is due to propagation phenomena (at a given time, currents and voltages are not the same in the coil)?

[gyulasun]

Okay, good. Now it looks like that the bifilar coil operates with a much different self capacitance value when you measure its 2330 kHz resonance. In that case all the 4 winding ends are floating and I think the 703 uH self inductance cannot be influenced by the 55 nF capacitance.   When you drive the bifilar coil from the generator as per you schematic, the 55 nF is inherently connected into the circuit. 
This is because the 55 nF is between the two windings but not across any one of the bifilar windings, ok?
The 2330 kHz resonance should be a parallel resonance for any one of the windings, coming from the 703 uH and a 6.63 pF self capacitance for any one of the windings.
This 6.63 pF is in parallel with the 703 uH winding, I calculated from the normal formula C = 1/(L*ω²).   
What do you think?

Gyula